With all the focus in the media and on these boards about Sox attendance and how the Cubs are taking business away from them every day, I was heartened to see that the Sox paid into MLB's revenue sharing pool.

The White Sox demise, at least as a revenue-producing business, appears to have been exaggerated.

Link (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1803536)

samram

05-18-2004, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by joecrede
With all the focus in the media and on these boards about Sox attendance and how the Cubs are taking business away from them every day, I was heartened to see that the Sox paid into MLB's revenue sharing pool.

The White Sox demise, at least as a revenue-producing business, appears to have been exaggerated.

Link (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1803536)

By the same token, we should be disheartened that a profitable venture won't spend more money on its product to bring it to the next level, and instead cries poor (relatively).

Hangar18

05-18-2004, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by samram
By the same token, we should be disheartened that a profitable venture won't spend more money on its product to bring it to the next level, and instead cries poor (relatively).

Exactly. Poor sox .........content with Just Getting By

joecrede

05-18-2004, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by samram
By the same token, we should be disheartened that a profitable venture won't spend more money on its product to bring it to the next level, and instead cries poor (relatively).

The payroll increased this year though. Given the All-Star game was last year and the team's September collapse, I'm sure they forecasted fewer season ticket sales this year and used last year's profit to subsidize that increase.

With the ticket price increase this year, if attendance is similar to last year's we should see another bump up in payroll next year.

rahulsekhar

05-18-2004, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by joecrede
With all the focus in the media and on these boards about Sox attendance and how the Cubs are taking business away from them every day, I was heartened to see that the Sox paid into MLB's revenue sharing pool.

The White Sox demise, at least as a revenue-producing business, appears to have been exaggerated.

Link (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1803536)

Anyone with a better memory than I know what that means in terms of their revenues? I mean if they're paying just a little bit in, does that mean they're just above average in revenues? Or is there a threshhold like only the top 30% of teams pay in, so the Sox are slightly above 70% of teams in revenues?

If this shows that they're slightly above average, then a payroll slightly above average isn't that surprising and is, in fact consistent with what they say: that they put all available resources on the field but don't run in the red.

joecrede

05-18-2004, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Anyone with a better memory than I know what that means in terms of their revenues? I mean if they're paying just a little bit in, does that mean they're just above average in revenues? Or is there a threshhold like only the top 30% of teams pay in, so the Sox are slightly above 70% of teams in revenues?

If this shows that they're slightly above average, then a payroll slightly above average isn't that surprising and is, in fact consistent with what they say: that they put all available resources on the field but don't run in the red.

Look at the numbers and you see that all of our central division rivals (Minny, Detroit, KC, Cleveland) get upwards of 15 million with the exception of Cleveland. But, we give up money. I know it is for the best, but I wish that they didn't get so much being our rivals and all.